[J99]

Originally Posted by DJ Soup

da fuq?

Fed's RG win is questionable? Wasn't he like 4 or 5 times RG finalist? Someone that gets to the finals so many times ought to win it, no?

Ah, but see Fed didn't have to face Rafa, so for me it's maybe not a true RG win, for it to be a true one he has to beat Rafa there.

[DJ Soup]

Originally Posted by J99

Ah, but see Fed didn't have to face Rafa, so for me it's maybe not a true RG win, for it to be a true one he has to beat Rafa there.

I'm not even going to try to reply to that stupidity

[piterpol]

Originally Posted by Johnny Groove

A lot of these guys are all really close, maybe it would be easier to have a tier system:

Tier 1:
Laver, Rosewall, Federer, Budge, Sampras, Gonzales, Tilden, Borg, Kramer, Renshaw, L. Doherty

Tier 2:
Lendl, Vines, Nadal, Perry, Connors, McEnroe, Agassi, Cochet, Larned, Wilding, Riggs

Tier 3:
Becker, Edberg, Wilander, Djokovic, Hoad, R. Doherty, Newcombe, Lacoste

This is more or less the true tier list, the top 30. Maybe throw Sedgman and Trabert in there in tier 3 for an even 32 man fictional event.

I was reading Kramer's book, and he was discussion the GOAT question, and he mentioned: "Well most of the new guys wonder what if we played in the current era (1979 at the time). Well I'll counter and say how would they fare in our era?" The era of barnstorming tours and different cities every night.

No estoy de acuerdo!

TOP 30 G.O.A.T CURRENT AT 26 SEPT IS:

1.Roger Federer (SUI):_(17GS, 6MC, 21 MS, N°1: 2004-2007 y 2009, 237 semanas consecutivas como N°1 (record), record indiscutido de 290 semanas #1, record mismo GS era open 7 WB (empatado con Nadal y Sampras), Ganador GS carrera 2009, 5 Wimbledon consecutivos (2003-2007), 5 US Open consecutivos (2004-2008), 17 Grand Slam (record), 10 finales consecutivas de GS (record), 23 semifinales consecutivas de GS (record), record vigente de 33 cuartos de final consecutivos en GS, maximo rival: Nadal)

2.Rod Laver (AUS):_ (11GS, 8PS, N°1: 1965-1969, co-numero 1 en 1964 y 1970, Ganador GS amateur 1962, Ganador del Pro Slam en 1967 y único ganador GS era open 1969, 30 de 34 finales de majors entre 1960 y 1969, maximo rival: Rosewall)

3.Ken Rosewall (AUS):_(8GS,15PS,5MS, N°1: 1961-1963, co-numero 1 en 1960,1964 y 1970, jugador con mas Majors de la historia (23), Ganador del Pro Slam en 1963, 26 años como top20, 20 como top10, 12 años como top3, 7 French Pro consecutivos (1960-1966), 6 majors en clay, 8 majors en cesped, 9 majors e indoos, record: mayor diferencia de años entre su primer y último GS (19 años) maximo rival: Laver)

4.Pete Sampras (USA):_(14GS,5MC,11MS, N°1: 1993-1998, 4 Wimbledon consecutivos(1997-2000), 286 semanas totales como #1 (2° detrás de federer), record mismo GS era open 7 WB (empatado con Federer y Nadal), mejor % de victorias en finales de GS era open (77,7%; 14/18) empatado con Gonzales en años indiscutido como numero 1 del mundo, maximo rival: Agassi)

5.Bill Tilden (USA):_ (10GS, 4PS, 1HCCC, 16MS, N°1: 1920-1921,1923-1925, 1931, co-numero 1 en 1922, 6 US Open consecutivos (1920-1925), 7 Copa Davis, record de 95 victorias consecutivas, 8 GS consecutivos (6 USO + 2WB), reconocido indiscutidamente como el mejor tenista de la primera mitad del siglo XX; maximo rival: Johnston, y en profesionales: Cochet, Lacoste, Budge, Vines, Nusslein, Perry)

6.Pancho Gonzales (USA):_ (2GS,12PS, 7MS, N°1:1954-1959, co-numero 1 en 1952 y 1960, 7 US Pro consecutivos (1953-1959), record de 6 años como #1 del mundo indiscutido, record de 8 años consecutivos como #1 (2 años como co-#1), reconocido unanimemente como el mejor tenista de la era profesional pre-open, máximo rival: Segura, Hoad, Trabert, Sedgman no hay uno en particular)

7.Bjorn Borg (SUE):_ (11GS,2MC,15MS, N°1: 1978-1980, co-numero 1 en 1977, 5 Wimbledon consecutivos (1976-1980), 3 (RG+ WB) consecutivos 1978-1980, mejor % victorias era open (82,7%) y en torneos GS (89,8%), unico jugador en ganar 3 GS sin perder sets (2RG+WB), mejor % de victorias al llegar a un quinto set, mejor % de victorias sobre top-10 (70,5%, 67-28), maximo rival: McEnroe)

8.Don Budge (USA):_(6GS, 4PS, 6MS, N°1: 1938-1940, 1942, (co-numero 1 en 1937), primer Ganador en ganar el Grand Slam en 1938 ( record junto a Laver), Ganador del PS de carrera en 1940, 6 GS consecutivos, 9 Majors consecutivos (6GS+3PS 1938-1940), mayor cantidad de victorias consecutivas en GS (37 victorias))

9.Rafael Nadal (ESP):_ (11GS,0MC,21MS,1JJOO 2008, 3 CD, N°1: 2008 y 2010, 7 Roland Garros (record era open junto a Sampras y Federer en un mismo GS), 4 RG consecutivos (2005-2008), Ganador GS de carrera mas joven era open (2010), record: ganador de 3 GS consecutivos en 3 superficies distintas (2010), 81 victorias consecutivas en arcilla mejor record masculino era open en una superficie)

10.Ivan Lendl (USA):_ (8GS,5MC,22MS,N°1:1985-1987, mayor cantidad de finales perdidas en GS (11), record finales consecutivas en MC(9) y USO (8), unico jugador en la era open en tener por lo menos 28 titulos en 3 superficies distintas (clay, carpeta y hard), mejor racha de partidos en carpeta con 66 (empatado con Mcenroe)

11.Jimmy Connors (USA):_(8GS,1MC,17MS, N°1:1974,1976,1982, 3 US Open en 3 superficies distintas (clay americano, pasto y clay), mayor cantidad de titulos y victorias era open 109 y 1242 respectivamente)

12.André Agassi (USA):_(8GS,1MC,17MS,1JJOO 1996, N°1: 1999, Ganador de GS carrera 1999, unico jugador era open en ganar todos los titulos importantes, jugador mas viejo en retomar el N°1 en la era open a los 33 años)

13.John McEnroe (USA):_ (7GS,3MC,19MS,N°1:1981,1983-1984, Mejor temporada era open 82-3, mejor racha de partidos en carpeta con 66 (empatado con Lendl))

14.Roy Emerson (AUS):_ (12GS, 8 Copa Davis, alcanzó el N°1 en 1964, máximo ganador del AO en 6 ocasiones, 5 seguidas (1963-1967), 3° racha mas larga de la historia: 55 partidos consecutivos)

15.Fred Perry (ING):_(8GS,2PS,3MS,N°1: 1935-1937 y 1941, (1934 numero 1 indiscutido), primer jugador en ganar los 4 Grand Slam (Ganador de GS carrera 1935), primer jugador en lograrlo)

16.Boris Becker (ALE):_(6GS,3MC,13MS, alcanzó N°1 en 1991, Jugador mas joven en ganar Wimbledon a los 17 años)

17.Henry Cochet (FRA):_ (7GS,1PS, 1WHCC,2WCCh, 17MS, JJOO: Plata 1924, N°1: 1928-1930, Ganador de 6 Copa Davis con Francia, nunca jugó AO)

18.Lawrence Doherty (ING):_ (6GS,JJOO: 1900, N°1: 1903-1906, co-numero 1 en 1902, 4 Copa Davis (1903-1906), 5 Wimbledon consecutivos (1902-1906), Mejor año 1903 (ganó todos los majors importantes), durante su carrera RG lo disputaban solo franceses, y el AO comenzó recién en 1905)

19.Ellsworth Vines (USA):_ (3GS, 5PS, N°1: 1932, co-numero 1 en 1935-1937, venció en finales de Majors a Tilden, Perry, Cochet, solo perdió 2 finales contra Budge (Crawford (WB en 1933) y French Pro 1939)

20.Stefan Edberg (SUE):_(6GS,1MC,8MS, 1JJOO 1984, N°1:1990-1991, Quedó a 1 set de lograr el GS de carrera (perdió RG 1989 con Chang) y lograr el hito de Agassi)

21.Jack Kramer (USA):_ (3GS, 2PS, N°1: 1948,1949,1951 y 1953, co-numero 1 del mundo en 1950 y 1952)

22.Mats Wilander (SUE):_(7GS,0MC, 8MS,N°1: 1988, 1 de 6 jugadores en ganar 3 GS en una misma temporada en la era open)

23.Bobby Riggs (USA):_ (3GS,3PS,N°1: en el período de la SGM (1943-1945) y 1946, Mejor jugador de la década de los ´40 junto a Budge)

24.Tony Wilding (NZL):_ (6GS,5MS,1WCCH,1WCCC,N°1: 1913, co-numero 1 en 1911 y 1912, 4 Wimbledon consecutivos (1910-1913), mejor Neozelandés de la historia)

25.Lew Hoad (AUS):_ (4GS, 1 PS, alcanzó el numero 1 del mundo en 1956, 1 de 4 jugadores en ganar los primeros 3 GS de la temporada (AO+RG+WB) en 1956 ( con Budge, Laver y Crawford), perdió 7 finales de Pro Slam todas contra Gonzales y Rosewall en 6/7, donde ambos fueron # 1 indiscutidos)

26.Novak Djokovic (SERB):_ (5GS,1MC,11MS,1JJOO,1CD, N°1: 2011, 3 AO, 3 GS y 5 MS en 2011, 43 partidos ganados consecutivos, 27 partidos consecutivos ganados en GS consecutivos (WB2011-RG2012 empatado con Federer)

27.John Newcombe (AUS):_ (7GS,4CD, fue co-número 1 del mundo en 1970-1971, 3 WB, 2 USO Y 2 AO)

28.René Lacoste (FRA):_ (7GS,N°1: 1926 Y 1927, 3 RG, 2 WB, 2 USO y 2 CD, venció en finales de Majors a Tilden y Cochet)

29.Williams Renshaw (ING):_ (7GS,N°1:1881-1886, ganador de 6 Wimbledon seguidos (1881-1886); 7 Wimbledon (empatado con Federer y Sampras), el último GS en 1889)

30.Jack Crawford (AUS):_ (6GS, N°1: 1933, 3 GS en 1933, estuvo a 1 set de ganar el GS ese año, durante 73 años fue record de finales consecutivas de GS con 7, superado por Federer el 2007)

[J99]

Originally Posted by DJ Soup

I'm not even going to try to reply to that stupidity

LOL, you know it's true, Fed din't have to play anyone really good to win it, a vulture major if ever there was one.

[Litotes]

Originally Posted by J99

LOL, how is only winning 8 majors, only 3 years at #1 and never winning the French blemishes for Connors, only 8 majors really, that's more than most, same as 3 years at #1, remember this bit "Connors was World #1 for 160 straight weeks, 268 total weeks." many great players never won the French like Sampras for instance, and Fed's win is questionable, Connors also has more titles than anyone ever, he should be further up that list, but hey it's your list.

Indeed more than most. The point of calling this "blemishes" is to explain why he is not further up the rankings. As you will notice, those above him tend to have even more than eight. Connors has 109 titles and 12xx match wins (sources differ) but is of course not GOAT simply because of that. If the sole point of GOAThood is winning most titles (any titles) and matches, then no player since Connors has made an attempt at obtaining this status. Sampras, Agassi, Federer and Nadal "wasted" their time going after majors when they could have vultured small tournaments left, right and centre. Why do you think that is?

But if you feel you can make a convincing argument for why three titles in North Conway, three in Columbus, two in Stowe and six in Birmingham (US) is better than seven Wimbledons, by all means. Go right ahead.

Finally, Connors does not have more titles than anyone else. Laver won 200 titles.

[J99]

Originally Posted by Litotes

Indeed more than most. The point of calling this "blemishes" is to explain why he is not further up the rankings. As you will notice, those above him tend to have even more than eight. Connors has 109 titles and 12xx match wins (sources differ) but is of course not GOAT simply because of that. If the sole point of GOAThood is winning most titles (any titles) and matches, then no player since Connors has made an attempt at obtaining this status. Sampras, Agassi, Federer and Nadal "wasted" their time going after majors when they could have vultured small tournaments left, right and centre. Why do you think that is?

But if you feel you can make a convincing argument for why three titles in North Conway, three in Columbus, two in Stowe and six in Birmingham (US) is better than seven Wimbledons, by all means. Go right ahead.

Finally, Connors does not have more titles than anyone else. Laver won 200 titles.

Actually, most of the guys ahead of Connors do not have more than 8, only Budge, Nadal, Federer, Sampras, Bjorg, Laver and Tilden do, plus Budge and Tilden won theirs not in the open era, so they wasn't facing the best competition possible, vulture titles, Laver won some of his in this era also.

I never said that winning those titles was better than Wimby, just that he won majors plus everything else, which most players can't.

Incorrect, Laver has 39 ATP titles.

[Litotes]

Originally Posted by J99

Actually, most of the guys ahead of Connors do not have more than 8, only Budge, Nadal, Federer, Sampras, Bjorg, Laver and Tilden do, plus Budge won his not in the open era, so he wasn't facing the best competition possible, Lave won some of his in this era also.

Incorrect, Laver has 39 ATP titles.

Looking closely, you will notice OP includes pro slams, and thus most of those above Connors has more than eight. Rosewall, for instance, has 23.

As for Laver and titles:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_Lav...eer_statistics

[Litotes]

Originally Posted by J99

I never said that winning those titles was better than Wimby, just that he won majors plus everything else, which most players can't.

You gave Connors as your #1, ahead of Federer (with Lendl in between) because of lots of small titles. Federer has more of the big ones. Three AOs more, one RG more, five Wimbys more. Equal in USO. Fed better in WTF, Fed better in Masters-equivalent tourneys. Where is Connors better? At what is today known as ATP 500 and ATP 250. So obviously you give a lot of weight to these two categories. Thus my comparison. I am glad that you got second thoughts as to which of those were better.

[J99]

Originally Posted by Litotes

Looking closely, you will notice OP includes pro slams, and thus most of those above Connors has more than eight. Rosewall, for instance, has 23.

As for Laver and titles:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_Lav...eer_statistics

Nice try with the pro majors too thing, I don't really care what players did before the open era, especially the aussie open for a long time, for the longest time the AO had very weak fields, so winning it isn't a big deal, even then I consider tennis today to be quite different than Bjorg's era for instance, so I don't think we can really compare players from different era's and say "he's better than him", we can only compare at most the last 10 years, but maybe not even that.

I only care about what Laver did on the ATP tour/open era, and he got 39 titles, so be it, this is the page you should be looking at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_Laver

[Litotes]

Originally Posted by J99

Nice try with the pro majors too thing, I don't really care what players did before the open era, especially the aussie open for a long time, for the longest time the AO had very weak fields, so winning it isn't a big deal.

I only care about what Laver did on the ATP tour/open era, and he got 39 titles, so be it, this is the page you should be looking at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_Laver

If you don't care what happened before the Open Era then why are you commenting this list? It is clearly labeled "Ever" not "Open Era". I might just as well say I don't care what happened before 1990 and exclude Connors altogether.

[J99]

Originally Posted by Litotes

If you don't care what happened before the Open Era then why are you commenting this list? It is clearly labeled "Ever" not "Open Era". I might just as well say I don't care what happened before 1990 and exclude Connors altogether.

The thing is though you can't really make even remotley valid comparisons until the open era, so saying ever in this case is major hyperbole.

[Litotes]

Originally Posted by J99

The thing is though you can't really make even remotley valid comparisons until the open era, so saying ever in this case is major hyperbole.

Wrong pronoun. I can. Johnny Groove can. If J99 cannot, and limits himself to the Open Era, then OK. You will find that in this case Connors is ranked 6th, behind Federer, Sampras, Borg, Nadal and Lendl. And that those above him on the list tend to have more than eight slams. Thus "only" eight slams, your original gripe, is still valid. If you feel the AO should be disregarded, then Connors has seven majors and those above him on the list will still tend to have more than his seven. Federer has 13 non-AO slams, Sampras has 12, Borg has 11, Nadal has ten. There is no other way of getting Connors to the top than to attribute great importance to ATP 500- and ATP 250-equivalent tournaments.

[J99]

Originally Posted by Litotes

Wrong pronoun. I can. Johnny Groove can. If J99 cannot, and limits himself to the Open Era, then OK. You will find that in this case Connors is ranked 6th, behind Federer, Sampras, Borg, Nadal and Lendl. And that those above him on the list tend to have more than eight slams. Thus "only" eight slams, your original gripe, is still valid. If you feel the AO should be disregarded, then Connors has seven majors and those above him on the list will still tend to have more than his seven. Federer has 13 non-AO slams, Sampras has 12, Borg has 11, Nadal has ten. There is no other way of getting Connors to the top than to attribute great importance to ATP 500- and ATP 250-equivalent tournaments.

You forgot masters.

So ok you are correct, but I already said that those guys have more majors than Connors, except Lendl.

[Litotes]

Originally Posted by J99

You forgot masters.

I mentioned Masters earlier. Connors has 17. He beats Sampras and Borg in this respect, but obviously not Lendl, Federer and Nadal (and McEnroe). So this category will decidedly not help him make #1:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennis_...and_statistics

[J99]

Originally Posted by Litotes

I mentioned Master earlier. Connors has 17. He beats Sampras and Borg in this respect, but obviously not Lendl, Federer and Nadal:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennis_...and_statistics

But I'll give you that Masters today are worth more now than they were, cause I don't think players were required to play them then as they do nowadays.